Previous Post
Next Post


Something that has really taken off in recent years for cable networks covering the State of the Union address is putting a bunch of people in a cramped room, forcing them to watch the speech and asking them to twiddle a knob based on whether they like what they hear. Almost like something out of Clockwork Orange, if you think about it. Anyway, what we get out of that focus group is an interesting breakdown of what parts of the President’s speech went over well with the allegedly representative group and which parts they didn’t like. And according to one such poll, they weren’t partial to the President’s pro-gun control message . . .

From what I can see, it looks like as soon as Obama started talking about gun control his numbers drooped. People didn’t like what he had to say. Overall they disagreed, or were at best indifferent. Democrats, who were cross-eyed and sweaty over the the Commander in Chief’s other proposals, had a tiny spike that quickly disappeared back into overall indifference over the gun control comments. In short, Dems didn’t seem to care.

That’s pretty much on par with what we’re seeing nation wide. A recent study found that while gun control is on the national agenda, its WAY down the list of what people think are the most important issues facing the nation. Jobs and the economy dominate what people are most concerned about, with gun control ranking something like 18th out of 21 issues.

What’s really interesting is how closely the independent voters agreed with the Republicans. While Obama may not need to worry about re-election anymore, the Democratic members of congress could have some tough fights ahead of them. And in races where independent voters gave those politicians their margins of victory, it’s likely that they will find themselves out of a job if their opponents are able to make gun control one of the major issues of the next election campaign.

If these numbers are to be believed, we might see gun control slipping back into the background on a national level. Thanks (ironically) in part to Dianne Feinstein’s full-speed charge against our civil rights, the gun owners of America were mobilized and pushed back hard. However, while the battle is going well for gun owners on the national level, the war will be won or lost on the state level.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • And we need to scream it from the rooftops at every opportunity: “Our constitution was written in a manner to protect the rights of the few from the will of the majority.”

    • Things (I hope) will slow on the fed level when/if they get (or, hopefully, dont) some kind of background check through (better read whats in it before you pass it). Its the state shit that will take ALOT of time to roll back (if/when possible).
      The big worry: The next horrible shooting event.
      God help us then.

  1. The federal crap is just a smoke screen to keep us busy while the states pass all of their draconian laws virtually un-noticed.

    • +1 for your overall point

      Although, I wouldnt say un-noticed. Especially looking at LaRue, Olympic Arms and York Arms regarding New York.

      • Perhaps un-noticed was a poor choice of words. I just forsee a handful of states going full retard and those who live in “free” states losing their ambition and drive they have shown on a national level because it doesn’t effect them. Sorry, I’m in Kommiefornia so I’m going by past experiences.

        • No need to appologize and if it came off as crtiscism then I should say sorry. I dont know much about California except for what I read, never give up hope though. If you ever can, relocate. I went from Connecticut to Tennesee and it was a great choice, though I may relocate away from Memphis.

        • “Unhindered” is a better word choice, since the state level actions don’t need approval of anyone except the people making this s**t up. The actions at the fed level probably never had a chance in hell of passing, and was all a smoke screen (and convenient excuse) for state action. “See – the feds aren’t trying to help. We have to do this with state laws!”

      • Bravo for these manufacturers. They also need to write into their contracts with other states that these weapons cannot be transferred to states with such prohibitions for their citizens.
        Next we need some pro-gun states to pass laws making it illegal to sell prohibited weapons, accessories and related services to state agencies where these are outlawed for their citizens. In fact, we need some pro-gun US Senators & Reps to introduce such legislation in the US Congress.

      • Well you do know if you go oh about 20 miles west across the river we would welcome you with open arms!!!
        Arkansas isn’t far away and got some beautiful women and country!!!
        I’ll even have you a cold beer waiting!!!

    • We had 1000+ show up in our tiny state of Maryland to voice our concerns. We are organized and pissed off. What happened in NY won’t happen here, no matter what King O’Malley wants.

  2. GC is exactly right, these people know an AWB will not pass the house, probably not the senate. But the states where dems have strong majorities, u folks are in a bit of a pickle I’m afraid.

    • I don’t think it is about losing ambition and drive because it doesn’t affect me. I truly wish there was some way for me to help my fellow gun owners in the states that have passed or are considering legislation to restrict the rights of their citizens But I can write letters, call, email, whatever, when they find out I don’t live in their state and can’t vote in their elections, I will be ignored. It is up to the people in these states to fight this, and to convince low-information voters to educate themselves. Otherwise they must live witht the restrictions, or relocate.

      • One thing you can do…

        Write to out-of state legislators that you have never or rarely contributed financially to a political campaign. But, that will be changing. Suggest that whoever the gun grabber’s future opponent may be will get your support.

  3. being an independent, I’m not surprised to see them agree with republicans on the gun issue, it’s where the facts and common sense reside if you bother to look for yourself and hear what both sides have to say about it

      • It just goes to show the strong Libertarian sentiments that are still holding out hope for the Republican party. I bet is you could poll those exact people on social issues, you’d see the split.
        I myself left the red-camp ages ago. I firmly believe if more of us left and in mass, the Rep. party could die-off and the Liberatrian party could finally make some headway.

  4. While those of us who are concerned about preservation of the Founders Intent and their codifying of the “Rights of Men” coupled with at least some in the industry taking a hard line stand in defense of same; it is never-the-less pretty clear that the left and the uninspired are either for some kind of gun control or not concerned if it comes.

    A clear majority voted for this guy and if push comes to shove, you can bet they will back his play. The LEO community seems to be split on the issue although I have yet to talk to a single one who supports any single element of the anti-gun agenda. Those I have spoken to are all private arms owners, most former Marines, like myself, all support increased penalties for criminals.

    This whole issue hinges on the perceptions of those in DC. If they think the wind is blowing in favor, we will have a rough ride. If they think the country (or at least their constituency) is “having any”, they will vote it down.

    I am not a betting man but right now it seems the info campaign and the media are driving this and people being the somewhat dimwitted critters that they are, are very likely to be swayed by their favorite morning hour commentator…

  5. “They deserve a vote”.
    Careful with that. Income tax was declared unconstitutional, so the anti-income tax people put it up for vote, thinking it would be struck down, ending the idea forever. Eventually it passed and the states ratified it, and it became the 16th amendment.
    You all know what later transpired with income tax.

  6. Good to see gun control and climate change scored that low. Even speaking in platitudes no one really wants these restrictions.

  7. interesting that there is no scale on those figures, and I think I know why. I was talking to my dad during the SOTU and he was constantly voting on the poll (negative).. and the numbers for even the democrats was at a -50 or so for most of the speech.. with republicans and democrats even lower. I had checked it out and it was lucky to go over -40 (on a scale of -100 to +100), with the democrats.

    At one point my dad said that they took the live graphic off the screen as it was soooo bad.

    not posting the scale sure makes it look better. I dont think it ever broke above 0 during the speech.

  8. Does gun control proposals START at 10:11? That almost makes it look like after he started talking about it, the approval went up. Or is the time stamp the middle of listed topic?

    • >> From what I can see, it looks like as soon as
      >> Obama started talking about gun control his numbers drooped.

      > after he started talking about it, the approval went up

      Without more information about those charts, I think Patrick’s interpretation is correct and Nick’s is wrong.

    • He shifted gears and started into the gun control section at 52:28 into the linked video, which was at 10:08.

      You know what was happening at 10:11? Obama had just told the story of Hadiya Pendleton, the 15 year-old girl from Chicago who performed for his inauguration three weeks ago, and then was killed a week later back in Chicago, in an apparent case of gang-related mistaken identity. He told her story, introduced her parents in the gallery, and then said (at 55:18), to a mostly Democrat standing ovation, that “they deserve a vote. They deserve a vote. (55:40, 10:11 p.m.) Gabby Giffords deserves a vote. The families of Newtown deserve a vote. The families of Aurora deserve a vote. The families of Oak Creek, and Tuscon, and Blacksburg, and the countless other communities ripped open by gun violence, they deserve a simple vote.” That Democrat bump you see on the graph at the 10:11 pointer was the Democrat focus group members reacting to the emotion of that moment, of the camera shots of the parents, and Gabby Giffords, and other people, and of the standing ovation. The Republican and Independent graphs didn’t move because they were not having a knee-jerk reaction to the blatant showmanship of that moment.

      If you split the difference between the 10:05 marked point and the 10:11 marked point, it’s apparent that the approval rating was headed down from the very beginning, and the only difference was the Democrats’ emotional response partway through. I’m going with Nick on this one.

      • Hmmm, thanks. That seems to make sense. I’ll have to look at it some more.
        Then again, maybe I have better things to do.

  9. I was surprised to hear the president using the phrase “They deserve a vote.” Instead of something stronger, like “They deserve justice.”, or “They deserve a plan.”.

    I think that the language was telling. It shows that he knows that he doesn’t have the votes, but he wants to try and force the show down anyway. I heard it as almost a concession. I sincerely hope that I am right.

    But as other have pointed out, the real fight is in the blue states.

  10. I agree this shows like other profs we are the majority. Most americans dont mind us owning AR-15s. Most gun owners own AR-15s. Good news. Hopefully see DiFis bill dead soon.

  11. > putting a bunch of people in a cramped room,
    > forcing them to watch the speech and asking
    > them to twiddle a knob based on whether they
    > like what they hear.

    What would really be cool is if each them were given a button or switch that sends a mild electric shock to the speaker.

    If enough of them don’t like what they hear, the shock becomes painful.

    • I love that idea.

      We should also do that every time he tries to sign a bill or announce an executive order. If enough folks don’t like it he won’t be physically able to do it.

  12. I really wish the focus group went from indifference to “HULK SMASH!!!!” every time some dumb politician tried to curtail our 2A (or any other) God-given rights.

  13. Even more obnoxious is the fact that Bing’s staff changed the graph’s axis after the speech. The raw data shows the responses never once made it into the positive area.

    They reconfigured the average in order to make it look like it was well received.

    I’m not surprised that even ancillary parts of the MSM feel the need to create artificial support for Obama, but I am disappointed.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here